Thrash vs NWOBHM?

[Halberd3]

That's odd, because I find it very easy to get into Anvil, and when I listen to them, I find it quite engaging, same with Raven, albeit to a minutely lesser degree.

I could never get into Anvil. The vocals may have been the reason. I've found it easier to get into Raven than I have Anvil.

 

[H.P. Lovecraft]

I could never get into Anvil. The vocals may have been the reason. I've found it easier to get into Raven than I have Anvil.

I love Anvil's vocals. They're like a Cirith Ungol/AC/DC speed metal hybrid.

 

[Halberd3]

I love Anvil's vocals. They're like a Cirith Ungol/AC/DC speed metal hybrid.

That's an interesting perspective. To me it just sounds the vocals maybe too goofy.

 

[H.P. Lovecraft]

That's an interesting perspective. To me it just sounds the vocals maybe too goofy.

Eh, I like cheesy musicality, so it doesn't bother me so much.

 

[@M!T]

I think 80s American thrash was heavily influenced by the nwobhm. I'm sure you remember when Lars Ulrich posted the ad in search of musicians to jam with, he listed his preferences that included Budgie and Motorhead. Then there's Dave Mustaine who had cited Judas Priest and King Diamond as key early influences several times. We have Scott Ian who was inspired by the mighty Sabbath with Dio.

Also, it seems that a key reason why the thrash movement happened was probably because they wanted to demolish the glam and hair metal scenario with their version of metal and I'd say they were successful. The only glam act that survived the thrash aggression was Motley Crue. Then we had Pantera's transformation from glam to power groove.

However, I think if there was no NWOBHM, the thrash movement would never see the light.

 

[H.P. Lovecraft]

W.A.S.P. and Firehouse arguably made it through as well, Dokken too. Although, W.A.S.P. became more of a trad heavy and Christian metal outfit after their 80's glam heyday. They still retained some key elements of the glam sound though.

 

[Wyvern]

I think Raven has got the "Anvil syndrome". The music is ok*, but something prevents you from really truly enjoy what you hear.

I think you nail it, since I have the same problem with Anvil (and Mercyful Fate/King Diamond, Accept), the music is alright but the vocals deter me to enjoy the band.

Most probably same reason I don't listen to death or black, or anything with harsh vocals. I'm very picky regarding what the guy/gal opening the mouth must sound like.

 

[Talos of Atmora]

I think you nail it, since I have the same problem with Anvil (and Mercyful Fate/King Diamond, Accept), the music is alright but the vocals deter me to enjoy the band.

Most probably same reason I don't listen to death or black, or anything with harsh vocals. I'm very picky regarding what the guy/gal opening the mouth must sound like.

 

[Halberd3]

I think 80s American thrash was heavily influenced by the nwobhm. I'm sure you remember when Lars Ulrich posted the ad in search of musicians to jam with, he listed his preferences that included Budgie and Motorhead. Then there's Dave Mustaine who had cited Judas Priest and King Diamond as key early influences several times. We have Scott Ian who was inspired by the mighty Sabbath with Dio.

Also, it seems that a key reason why the thrash movement happened was probably because they wanted to demolish the glam and hair metal scenario with their version of metal and I'd say they were successful. The only glam act that survived the thrash aggression was Motley Crue. Then we had Pantera's transformation from glam to power groove.

However, I think if there was no NWOBHM, the thrash movement would never see the light.

Does this influence you when you pick a favorite? Agreed, it's because of the NWOBHM that both Thrash and the NWOTHM exist. In case you don't know, the NWOTHM is the new wave of traditional heavy metal. They've been going on strong for 6 years imo. A lot of great bands. I feel they take more from the NWOBHM than thrash does. Maybe a revitalization of the sound while adding some new stuff to it.

 

[CiG]

Anvil's second album is one of the best of that era, man.

 

[Sonic Titan]

Do you guys have any preference for one of the other? To me it's something I've thought about all day. And from both scenes I noticed things.

NWOBHM
1. Took some influence from punk rock (sounds like around guitars and production)
2. A bit more melodic than thrash
3. Didn't really have a natural music enemy
4. Continuation of the first wave of heavy metal from their predecessors. Whom had more of a blues rock influence.
5. Varied a lot in what styles they went for.

But for things what I may call a downside or something that brought the NWOBHM down it'd be.
1. Could be boring at times. Based on tastes, like you may think it's never enough
2. It left as quick as it came. Which I think the New wave began in 1979 and ended in 1984 I think. Then Thrash took over.
3. Major record labels, style changes, and going underground. Which is where I think Saxon is at right. Underground. Raven and Diamond Head went onto a major record label, and the albums we got from them when they did. Were subpar. Canterbury and Stay Hard. In a way it kinda killed what NWOBHM was about. But I think there's ways it could've been made to work. And style change happened too. I don't really wanna go into too much detail there.

Thrash
1. Took a hell of a lot of influence from the American punk rock scene (Which I will not refer to as hardcore because that's just dumb).
2. More rhythmic, I hear a lot more of the bass following the drums then I do bass following the guitar and drums like I do with NWOBHM.
3. Had a natural enemy. Hair Metal, erghh. They were like the cobra and mongoose. Hated each other. Because one was a rip off and commercialization of true heavy metal. And the other was the spirit of the NWOBHM, after smoking meth and flying high with a vengeance.
4. Thrash can be repetitive. It can. Trust me, the drumming is usually what makes it sound the same. But it doesn't make it bad none the less

Downsides or so I think.
1. Burnout, some thrash metal bands had a habit of burning out after album number 2 or 3. It's raw energy, power, and speed. But I think at some point they used the best ideas first and that slightly killed them. That and they were inconsistent.
2. Repetition, as much as I said I was fine with it. It may have killed it off in a sense of them not really evolving their style or showing they can be diverse if they're only sticking to fast tempo drumming and thrash riffs with yelled vocals on social issues or death.
3. Lasted from 1983 to 1992. 9 years. What killed it afterwards is the rise of nu metal and alternative. No, better yet. Thrash committed suicide and saw revival around 2004. They wanted to show they can be different or jump on major label bandwagons for support. So they started doing alternative stuff. It alienated the fan base and killed what little support was left from around 1993-2003. But great, both of these genres are seeing revival.

So what do you think is better? And what do you prefer to listen to?

Good thread. Thrash is definitely superior to NWOBHM. The music, lyrics, and substance of the best of Thrash were major improvements over its predecessor. There's a reason why Metallica played to packed stadiums all over the world and Diamond Head never graduated from the club circuit.

 

[CiG]

Iron Maiden are NWOBHM.

Oh and the packed stadium logic is fucking retarded, Bieber and Kanye West play for packed stadiums and then some.

 

[Halberd3]

Iron Maiden are NWOBHM.

Oh and the packed stadium logic is fucking retarded, Bieber and Kanye West play for packed stadiums and then some.

Yeah it kinda is. Iron Maiden does too.

 

[Halberd3]

But I've read somewherene else. That the rules for thrash metal are too strict, that trying to stretch into experimental grounds could easily break what's thrash and what's not. In fact my friend said that even death metal is more moldable and has more room for experimenting. Do any of you think this is true?

 

[CiG]

Sounds like an insufferably boring opinion.

 

[Halberd3]

Sounds like an insufferably boring opinion.

how so?

 

[Wyvern]

But I've read somewherene else. That the rules for thrash metal are too strict, that trying to stretch into experimental grounds could easily break what's thrash and what's not. In fact my friend said that even death metal is more moldable and has more room for experimenting. Do any of you think this is true?

No.

Thrash has a lot of experimentation and complexity when it wants it: Coroner, Anacrusis, Watchtower, Toxik, Paradox, Forte and more. In my opinion death metal always has to have a guy (gal) grunting, make it melodic death (and oxymoron for me) does not make it more malleable. Paraphrasing his opinion experimentation breaks what's death and what's not, look what happened when bands experimented: Therion, Tiamat, Amorphis, Cynic, Opeth, Anathema.

So his opinion is as valid as mine, or both worthless.

 

[CiG]

I agree with the first part of your comment.

 

[Halberd3]

No.

Thrash has a lot of experimentation and complexity when it wants it: Coroner, Anacrusis, Watchtower, Toxik, Paradox, Forte and more. In my opinion death metal always has to have a guy (gal) grunting, make it melodic death (and oxymoron for me) does not make it more malleable. Paraphrasing his opinion experimentation breaks what's death and what's not, look what happened when bands experimented: Therion, Tiamat, Amorphis, Cynic, Opeth, Anathema.

So his opinion is as valid as mine, or both worthless.

Let's not forget Skeletonwitch. In my book, they've done the best to experiment with thrash. I feel like if one wants to get ahead in thrash they'll definitely have to experiment and make some good riffs. And not try to sound like some Exodus rip off. To explain how I feel about thrash today. I feel like it needs some work done to it, doesn't need a specific image of what's thrash or not, tell some of these guys to listen a wide spectrum of music,(classic heavy metal, jazz/fusion, blues rock, hard rock, etc.), and maybe try to experiment with vocals. I see none bad about trying to revive thrash nor do I hate it. I just wish some of these guys would come with some originality and not try to look like the back of Kill em All nor be so narrow-minded.

 

[CiG]

Revive thrash? The hell does that even mean...

Skeletonwitch stink, but there are plenty of awesome newer thrash bands doing original things with the style, just gotta look.